Ban Surgery for Athletes!!!

[MathGirl]

The use of steroids in athletics has been the subject of a huge stink for the last few years. Now a previously undetectable drug has been implicated in possibly enhancing the performance of athletes. In question are world records in track and field events and new home run records in baseball. This is particularly important in baseball, because it is a game of statistics and present day players are judged by how their performance compares to those who played the game in the past. It is felt that the use of performance enhancing drugs gives modern players an unfair advantage.

Anabolic steroids are a product of advancement in science and medicine over the past several decades. Another area in which significant progress has been made is in the field of surgery for athletic related injuries. In particular, the "Tommy John" ligament replacement surgery, minimally invasive arthroscopic surgery, and routine "cleaning out" of bone chips and other debris in the joints of baseball players. Also, diagnostic tools such as the MRI have made diagnosis of injuries much more accurate and treatment more effective. These procedures have enabled baseball players to prolong their careers and perform at their peak long after an athlete of the past would have retired.

It is my contention that, if anabolic steroids are banned in athletics, ALL OTHER ADVANCEMENTS IN MEDICINE, TRAINING, DIET, ETC. OVER THE PAST FIFTY YEARS SHOULD ALSO BE PROHIBITED IN PROFESSIONAL ATHLETICS. Only if this is done can today's players be honestly compared to those who played in the past.

I have a number of specific proposals, and I will be presenting them in this thread shortly. I would be interested in comments from others who are concerned about the sancity of sports in general and basebaall in particular.

MG

 

[Uncle Meat]

I'd like to see what would happen if you posted this out in the wilds of Usenet, where it would be open to the general population of idiots.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Ty Cobb sat on the bench filing his spikes and glaring at the other players on the field. Christy Matheson threw his games with a baseball that would hardly be considered a softball today. Comparing what Sandy Koufax did with the Rocket, Pedro, Maddux or Wodd is like comparing oranges and apples. The last pitcher who really could be compared to the greats was Nolan Ryan. With changes like 5 man rotations, specialized relivers and closers there just is no comparrison. The game has changed.

Advacned medical techniques keep players playing longer and better. Anabolic steroids produce greater muscle mass. Tommy John surgery is not something an athelete does to enhacne his performance, he does it to save his career. You don't see great pitchers having this surgery so they can throw harder or make their balls break more. Surgery, while in a limited sense enhances performance, i.e. you can extend your career, dosen't give you an unfair advantage over your competition. Comparing your stats against the greats of the past it confers only a marginal advantage as you have to be of top calibre to be competeing with them to start with.

In the early 70's professional football was really nothing more than 11 speed freaks trying to maim 11 other speed freaks. Use of Methanphetamine was that common. It wasn't good for the players or the game and was outlawed. Surgical procedures that keep you able to play don't hurt anyone and it is rare that anyone returns from such surgery to play at the same calibre they were playing at when they left.

Steroids are a whole differrent ballgame. They give the taker a physical advantage to make him a better player. Middle of the road players can put up monster power numbers by taking them, while still being only marginal players in other key areas like average, OBP, fielding percentage and strikeouts. Add juiced balls, lower mounds, credit card sized strike zones and players who wear enough armor that they would feel safe in Iraq so they can crowd the plate and you are looking at two different games almost.

Banning medical proceedures that help a player prolong their career is not the same as banning a substance that confers an unfair competitive advantage for those willing to risk the health complications. Is Barry Bond's homerun record tarnished if he used steoids? Possibly. McQuire's? Sosa's? again possibly. To a pureist 61 in 61 will forever remain the benchmark for homerun hitting greatness. To a casual fan Bonds's 73 is still 73 no matter what he might or might not have been taking.

Like all sports controversy, there is no quick and easy answer to how tarnished a user of steroids is. For me banning surgical procedures that allow a player to continue playing is a whole different kettle of fish from banning a drug that allows healthy players to excel over those who don't take the drugs. Surgery will never create an uneven playing field, steroids do.

Not bad for a non sports fan eh?

-Colly

 

[Guest]

Maths, in my opinion professional sports lost any semblence to what I believe you term sanctity some time ago. The last athlete I recall with personal integrity was Kareem Abdul Jabar.

I know it's great fun for you and others still, but it's a business at heart, at least in the states. I'll stay out of this now but I'm old enough to recall better days among athletes and fans and the cities that supported them (now it's conglomerate corporations).

Perdita

 

[MathGirl]

Re: Re: Ban Surgery for Athletes!!!

I'd like to see what would happen if you posted this out in the wilds of Usenet, where it would be open to the general population of idiots.

Dear Uncle M,
Yes, wouldn't it be interesting.
MG
Ps. CT, Records are greatly enhanced by increasing length of playing careers. With the nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs now available, Koufax probably could have pitched another ten years. J.H.Dean and R.M.Grove would not have had their careers hampered by sore arms if the newer surgical techniques had been available. Mickey Mantle wouldn't have spent so much time crippled from osteomyelitis if present day antibiotics had been around. He may have hit 900 home runs.
MG

 

[ffreak]

I am one who decries the use of professional athletes, especially those who use medicine, legal or otherwise, in armature events - like the Olympics. How do we justify the use of all-star athletes who are paid millions of dollars per year to compete against the few professionals meagerly divvied out among the teams of the rest of the world. Worse, how do we justify these actions and then lose?

They made Jim Thorpe wait until he was in the grave to let him have the medals he won just because he played sand-lot baseball one year to raise money for his tuition and books (he didn't get a medal for baseball). What makes it different for today's lineups?

-FF (hell no I don't think they should have let McGwire's record stand - once they learned he used artificial enhancements to make his muscles stronger than he could have without using drugs, they should have removed the record. If Maris could do it without drugs, McGwire should have done it without drugs)
ps. Rose is vilified for betting his team would win, whereas McGwire, the drug user, is set-up as a hero that all little boys should emulate. Gee, I wonder which is worse for their health?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Hey Perdita,

There are still a few atheltes who believe in the sanctity of their sport and are concious of not only it's history but of thier place in it.

Cal Ripken Jr was one. He played his whole career with one team and is very active in the Baltimore community, even after he retired.

Jerry Rice has been a modle of what a football player should be through his career. He came from a small school in Mississippi, when his school made it to a final four in the NCAA basketball tourney he found out they didn't have a sneaker contract. So he bought the whole team matching sneakers. He's active in the SF community. He can't be faulted for leaving the 49ers to go to Oakland. The forty niners wated him to retire and he felt he could still play.

Sports has become big bussiness and that has been to the detriment of the fans and their relationship to the players. A lot of young men don't know how to handle suddenly being handed more money than they could imagine and aren't mature enough to handle it. I wonder if any of us would be.

In sandlots across the country boys swing bats for the love of the game. They slide, dive and run trying to make plays only because they love the sport. Try finding something to do in Mississippi on a friday night during football season, it won't happen. Everyone is out watching the highschool guys play the game under the lights.

The pro version may be filled with pitfalls, but you have only to go back a few years and these guys were the ones with sticks for bats and one glove between them playing for the love of it. The sanctity of the game is still there, it's just harder to discern when multimillions of dollars and egos to match cloud what it's all about.

-Colly

 

[Guest]

Maths, I presume and hope you will ignore my other post as it was merely a personal opinion. But Colly makes very good points, and your imagining the possibilities of the past do not matter; e.g., Mantle was a hard drunk, I doubt surgery would have helped him play all that much longer.

However, re. the idea of how human bodies have developed, particularly those that are developed purposely, I do know about a dancer's body, particular in ballet. If you scan a book or two on great dancers of the past (including Nijinsky, still regarded as the 'ne plus ultra danseur'), it is obvious they were shorter, heavier in weight and bulkier in muscle (including the women). Yet one reads about their performances and realizes there was magic to be seen on stage.

Technique has developed so that ballet dancers today jump higher than ever, turn faster, hold balances longer, and have extensions unheard of just a few decades ago. But it is only technique; if I wanted only that I would go to the circus or the Olympics.

Some dancers can now go on longer than before due to improvement in medical and surgical techniques (as for athletes), but nothing replaces the art. I suggest something similar may be applied to athletics. I will never forget Kareem's elegance on the court.

Perdita (also not a sports fan)

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Re: Re: Ban Surgery for Athletes!!!

Dear Uncle M,
Yes, wouldn't it be interesting.
MG
Ps. CT, Records are greatly enhanced by increasing length of playing careers. With the nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs now available, Koufax probably could have pitched another ten years. J.H.Dean and R.M.Grove would not have had their careers hampered by sore arms if the newer surgical techniques had been available. Mickey Mantle wouldn't have spent so much time crippled from osteomyelitis if present day antibiotics had been around. He may have hit 900 home runs.
MG

No doubt some career records would be farther from reach had modern day medical techniques been avialable. But in truth do we really compare today's greats to those who were around back in the day? I'm in my thirties and the best player I can remember is Pete Rose. The Mic, Dimaggio, The Fat Kid, Clemente, Musial, Koufax, Reese, Rizzuto...these are names I know and players I know only from my father's enthusiastic accounts and perhaps some old footage I was forced to watch on ESPN classic when I went home last trip Wagner, Grove, Paige, now your talking my grandfather's recollections and they are mostly from radio.

For pure hitters I can't compare them to Williams, I have to compare them to the best I ever saw. In this case D. Strawberry. For pitching excellence? Maddux. Does B.Bonds diminish what Maris did? I don't think so. Breaking records set in the days before the "modern era" has always carried with it the unspoken asterik that it's a different accomplishment. Dead ball era pitchers piched complete games like it was going out of style. Now it's an accomplishment to go a full nine innings. 500 home runs used to be a lock for the Hall (unles you are D. Kingman) in twenty years it will likely be 700 or more as the commissioner looks for evermore ways to increase scoring and make the game "exciting" (read marketable). 300 wins used to be fairly common place in my grandfather's day, now it is pretty much a lock for the hall. Why? Because you just don't get that many opportunites in today's game.

-Colly

 

[MathGirl]

Mantle was a hard drunk, I doubt surgery would have helped him play all that much longer.

Dear Perdita,
Of course he was. His osteomyelitis, though, kept him on the disabled list for the equivalent of over three seasons during his prime. It wasn't surgery he needed, it was the new antibiotics. Also, there are new recognition and treatment modalities for substance abuse which may have both lengthened his career and improved his already incredible numbers.
MG
Ps. This whole idea occurred to me a while back, and I've had this thread in mind for several weeks. I knew it would stir up a hornets' nest. Should have started it sooner.
Pps. In my proposed model, no antibiotic marketed after 1960 could be used by athletes. Also, there would be no alcohol/drug abuse treatment programs. Oh, no contact lenses, either. There are many other proscribed areas, and I will post them as they become honed in my mind to the brilliant, pristine purity of true inspiration.

 

[Madame Manga]

I must admit that 'sanctity' is not a word that springs to mind when I think of professional sports. Or 'amateur' (Olympic) sports, or college sports, or even Little League. There is competition at stake in every level of sport; winning is its currency: therefore money is at stake. You cannot serve both God and Mammon, as the man said.

Naturally I don't advocate practices like those that produced the hairy-faced, deep-voiced East German women's swimming team. Coaches pressure teenagers to do some dreadful things--not all of them drug-related. But adult athletes must be presumed to be making their own decisions, even if they are not decisions that most of us would make. The athletic grind in general is not good for anyone's health, family or life expectancy.

Performance-enhancing drugs will always be with us, IMO, and as their safety increases, their use will inevitably increase. Strenuous efforts to stamp them out tend to catch innocents in the net as well as the guilty; recall the similar efforts to keep the Olympics the exclusive preserve of gentlemen who did not deign to make a living at what they did best. Was stripping Jim Thorpe's medals a purifying act?

I am not a baseball fan, since I lack the necessary patience. I watch professional wrestling, which does not even pretend to occupy an elevated plane above other forms of human activity.

MM

 

[MathGirl]

New rules for baseball players

Off season conditioning: There shall be none. All players will be weighed after the final game of the season. When they report for spring training, they must have gained twenty or more pounds. Physical condition will be such that running to first base will result in the need for CPR.

This rule will ensure that current day players to start the season as did those in the past.
MG

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: New rules for baseball players

Off season conditioning: There shall be none. All players will be weighed after the final game of the season. When they report for spring training, they must have gained twenty or more pounds. Physical condition will be such that running to first base will result in the need for CPR.

This rule will ensure that current day players to start the season as did those in the past.
MG

LOL,

Airline flights banned? they will all have to ride the bus? or train?

-Colly

 

[dr_mabeuse]

3 to 5 days, depending on how busy they are.

---dr.M.


No, actually, my position is that athletes should be given all the drugs and surgery they can stand. But then, I've never been much of a sports fan. I've never been able to understand why people would work so hard to try and do things that machines can do so much better.

 

[Quasimodem]

According to MathGirl, baseball players are to become the new Old Order Amish of Athletes, turning their backs on any innovation before an arbitrarily decided date.

Medicine proscribed? Even chewing tobacco! A hard road, there.

All surgery banned? Well, okay.

If a player develops appendicitis during the season, he will just have to take his chances that it won't burst before the end of the World Series.

There is only one admissible exception to this rule — cosmetic surgery.

Cosmetic surgery, alone must be waived, for the good of product endorsement advertising.

An occasional bursting appendix may be condoned as comedy relief.

However, the introduction of televised closeups during the game — game after game — is more than the spectators merit without the hope of cosmetic surgery.

For the good of the game, as much as can be done, should be done to correct the insults of a careless nature. Those exceptional examples of inbreeding, who conquer their well-deserved obscurity through genetic endowments of skill at the game, must not be forced to pit their performance against past players, without all the assistance modern medicine can procure.

Those golden players of yesteryear did not have to perform at an apparent distance seldom found outside the back seat of a Ford Mustang. Nor did their features, as digitalized images on a 50-inch plasma screen, grace their fans' very own living rooms. Not during the game, nor elsewhere, pitching their product endorsements.

Cast your mind back, to call up the images of those great players, not as they appear, full length, on two by three inch trading cards, but as a living colour head shot, enlarged to fill a 50-inch screen.

That truly is frightening!

For the purity of the game, for the emotional development of our unborn children, and most of all, for the health of the bottom line, cometic surgery must be exempted.

 

[snooper]

It is my contention that, if anabolic steroids are banned in athletics, ALL OTHER ADVANCEMENTS IN MEDICINE, TRAINING, DIET, ETC. OVER THE PAST FIFTY YEARS SHOULD ALSO BE PROHIBITED IN PROFESSIONAL ATHLETICS. Only if this is done can today's players be honestly compared to those who played in the past.

You forgot to include a ban on the use of aircraft to get from place to place. Those long train journeys to distant cities to play away fixtures were very tiring.

 

[MathGirl]

I have arbitrarily set 1960 as the cutoff point for advancements as applied to major league baseball.

Intercontinental jet travel was routine at that time, and travel was probably less time consuming because airports were less crowded, no antiterrorist inspections, etc.

Surgical procedures which were used before 1960 are allowed. No problem with appendectomies. Ty Cobb, by the way, had his tonsils removed, without anesthetic, while sitting in a chair in a hotel room. This indicates that Cobb was both tough and nuts.

Also, broken bones may be set with plaster casts. All other injuries are treated with ice, liniment, and aspirin. Real wimps who whine about compound franctures may be given morphine. Injuries to catchers are untreated.
MG

 

[Quasimodem]

Math,

I point you to my proposed exception of cosmetic surgery. That was not a 1960 standard.

Neither do I propose it as a crutch to the players, but rather as a sop to the viewers.

Quasi,

PS: Did anyone think to check Mr. Cobb's blood alcohol An alcohol level of 0.37 negates the use of anaesthesia.

 

[Jenny _S]

By setting 1960 as the cut off for medical advancement, MG, you have doomed many athletes to old technology and undue suffering. Orthoscopic Surgery which is necessary for many injuries suffered by athletes reduces the player's "bench time" and post surgical discomfort. This is an issue that cannot be discounted.

Also, in the 1980's we see the invention of "Sports Medicine", a field that looks at players in very different ways than they were before. Sports Medicine Doctors make better players by teaching them how to run, showing athletes the errors they make in the movement of their bodies that slow them down and teach them methods proven to avoid injury.

I agree that the use of all Anabolic Steroids should be banned but for reasons different than you suggest. These drugs have long term known and unknown side affects that shorten the life span of the user, cause heart desease, interfere with organ function, sexual dysfunction and many other things that far out weigh any advantage the player may gain from their use. In other words, Anabolic Steroids may make a better player for his 10 or so seasons active seasons, but there are another 30-50 years after his playing years to concider.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Does this mean you can have players smoking in the dugout again? Football players lighting up during halftime?

How about making them all hold to Babe Ruth standards: A pack of Luckies a day, 6 hot dogs before a game, a case of syphillis, and a pitcher full of gin and orange juice? If it was good enough for the Sultan of Swat...

As for anabolic steroids, I say legalize them. We need more athletes with no necks and tiny balls. It didn't hurt East Germany any.

---dr.M.

 

[Guest]

I had no idea Mab. was such a humorist. Been LOL at him lately (don't recall that happening to me before).

Perdita

 

[Quasimodem]

I had no idea Mab. was such a humorist. Been LOL at him lately (don't recall that happening to me before). Perdita

The good doctor has always been a humourist but so dry, that the Gobi is a veritable jungle rainforest in comparison.

 

[MathGirl]

In other words, Anabolic Steroids may make a better player for his 10 or so seasons active seasons, but there are another 30-50 years after his playing years to concider.

Dear Jenny,
I doubt if ten percent of pro athletes give a damn about the long term effects. They will do anything for stardom and big bucks during their playing careers. Most do not use steroids, though. Not because of long term effects, but because they play a position in which steroids does not enhance performance or they're afraid of getting caught.
MG
Ps. I've been told that in bodybuilding competition, they have special events for "natural" bodybuilders. They're quite minor league compared witht the steroid pumped Mr Universe events. There are two women bodybuilders who use my gym. They are both grotesquely muscular, hairy, baritones.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Speaking of bodybuilders, does anyone find these guys and girls the least bit attractive?

-Colly

 

[Guest]

Big NO from me. Frankly, I like my men somewhat consumptive looking (really).

Perdita